Home
News
INCLINE VILLAGE, Nev. — According to the Alliance for Excellent Education, in 2009, only 69 percent of all public school students actually attained a high school diploma. This is not a number we as Americans should be proud of. When a public school system seeks to “reform” or “improve” its current standings, too often, educators and politicians believe that throwing more money at low achieving districts will magically solve all of the other problems. This is where IB comes in.
In 2008, Elizabeth Brock, head of research, development and communications for IB North America, was quoted in U.S. News and World Reports as saying, “In the United States, the IB has received much support from governments and policy makers, including the U.S. Department of Education and local school districts, to increase student achievement and to turn around low-performing schools.”
Consider for a moment, that you, the taxpayers, are the ones who are funding the policy decisions of the U.S. Department of Education and your local school districts. We hear an awful lot about the need for accountability, but when it comes right down to it, where is the proof that this very expensive form of international education actually increases student achievement or turns around low-performing U.S. schools?
The answer is, there is no proof. A perfect example is the city of Chicago. In 1998, there was only one IB school. Under the leadership of Arne Duncan, our current head of the U.S. Department of Education, the number of public IB high schools in Chicago grew to 15, the most recent was authorized in February of 2009. Of the remaining 14, only one, Lincoln Park, met the NCLB benchmark of 62.5 percent (www.chicagobusiness.com/downloads/CPS.pdf) in reading, but failed to meet the benchmark for science. It is vital that districts considering IB pay attention to the following stats: In 2001, only 27.2 percent of the students in Chicago's public high schools met or exceeded 11th grade standards. In 2008, only 27.2 percent met or exceeded 11th grade standards. When calculated separately, an abysmal 50 percent of the IB schools came in below the 27.2 percent figure.
Eight years worth of data and not even one-tenth of 1 percent improvement. Ms. Brock's claim that IB received “support” from the U.S. government and policy makers is undoubtedly true. However, that support did not yield the intended results — or did it? It would be easy for our current administration to blame those results on President George W. Bush, but the fact of the matter is the spread of IB in Chicago came directly as a result of partial funding from the Annenberg Challenge, a board on which President Barack Obama and Bill Ayers both sat. Interestingly, as of April 2009, during Obama's first year in office, this Chicago Public Schools website (www.cps.k12.il.us/aboutcps/PressReleases/March_2005/IB_schools.htm) is “no longer a public-facing website.” However, in March 2005, Arne Duncan was quoted (http://truthaboutib.com/obamaduncanib.html) as saying about IB, “We're proud to be leading the nation in incorporating this program. We want as many students as possible to have access to a challenging and innovative program like the IBMYP provides.”
IB is nothing more than a political ruse to indoctrinate students by a foreign entity that is an arm of UNESCO. It should be clear that the Obama/Duncan endorsement of IB is a bigger part of its socialist political agenda to dumb-down our public schools and make them subservient to IBO's ideology to create “global citizens” and a New World Order.
Do not be swayed by globalist rhetoric and educationese espoused by elitists. Improving our public schools should be a priority. Americans are waking up. We are tired of being lied to, we are tired of seeing our hard-earned dollars being wasted on programs that don't work. In order to improve entire schools, we must focus our attention on providing the basics and real skills, not a designer label which benefits a handful of students who would naturally excel anyway with our existing educational options. I have shown you long-term, documented proof that IB does not improve low-achieving public schools. It is now up to you to apply common sense and prevent this program from taking over your schools, no matter how tempting short-term federal grant money may be. Because in the end, once IB gets its foot in your door, the federal money will disappear and the taxpayers get stuck holding the bag.
— Lisa McLoughlin, who lives in New York, is an administrator of the website truthaboutib.com, which also is run by parents from Maryland and Pennsylvania.
In 2008, Elizabeth Brock, head of research, development and communications for IB North America, was quoted in U.S. News and World Reports as saying, “In the United States, the IB has received much support from governments and policy makers, including the U.S. Department of Education and local school districts, to increase student achievement and to turn around low-performing schools.”
Consider for a moment, that you, the taxpayers, are the ones who are funding the policy decisions of the U.S. Department of Education and your local school districts. We hear an awful lot about the need for accountability, but when it comes right down to it, where is the proof that this very expensive form of international education actually increases student achievement or turns around low-performing U.S. schools?
The answer is, there is no proof. A perfect example is the city of Chicago. In 1998, there was only one IB school. Under the leadership of Arne Duncan, our current head of the U.S. Department of Education, the number of public IB high schools in Chicago grew to 15, the most recent was authorized in February of 2009. Of the remaining 14, only one, Lincoln Park, met the NCLB benchmark of 62.5 percent (www.chicagobusiness.com/downloads/CPS.pdf) in reading, but failed to meet the benchmark for science. It is vital that districts considering IB pay attention to the following stats: In 2001, only 27.2 percent of the students in Chicago's public high schools met or exceeded 11th grade standards. In 2008, only 27.2 percent met or exceeded 11th grade standards. When calculated separately, an abysmal 50 percent of the IB schools came in below the 27.2 percent figure.
Eight years worth of data and not even one-tenth of 1 percent improvement. Ms. Brock's claim that IB received “support” from the U.S. government and policy makers is undoubtedly true. However, that support did not yield the intended results — or did it? It would be easy for our current administration to blame those results on President George W. Bush, but the fact of the matter is the spread of IB in Chicago came directly as a result of partial funding from the Annenberg Challenge, a board on which President Barack Obama and Bill Ayers both sat. Interestingly, as of April 2009, during Obama's first year in office, this Chicago Public Schools website (www.cps.k12.il.us/aboutcps/PressReleases/March_2005/IB_schools.htm) is “no longer a public-facing website.” However, in March 2005, Arne Duncan was quoted (http://truthaboutib.com/obamaduncanib.html) as saying about IB, “We're proud to be leading the nation in incorporating this program. We want as many students as possible to have access to a challenging and innovative program like the IBMYP provides.”
IB is nothing more than a political ruse to indoctrinate students by a foreign entity that is an arm of UNESCO. It should be clear that the Obama/Duncan endorsement of IB is a bigger part of its socialist political agenda to dumb-down our public schools and make them subservient to IBO's ideology to create “global citizens” and a New World Order.
Do not be swayed by globalist rhetoric and educationese espoused by elitists. Improving our public schools should be a priority. Americans are waking up. We are tired of being lied to, we are tired of seeing our hard-earned dollars being wasted on programs that don't work. In order to improve entire schools, we must focus our attention on providing the basics and real skills, not a designer label which benefits a handful of students who would naturally excel anyway with our existing educational options. I have shown you long-term, documented proof that IB does not improve low-achieving public schools. It is now up to you to apply common sense and prevent this program from taking over your schools, no matter how tempting short-term federal grant money may be. Because in the end, once IB gets its foot in your door, the federal money will disappear and the taxpayers get stuck holding the bag.
— Lisa McLoughlin, who lives in New York, is an administrator of the website truthaboutib.com, which also is run by parents from Maryland and Pennsylvania.
